From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B675D138C9D for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2015 14:15:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5D423E083C; Thu, 16 Apr 2015 14:15:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gw2.antarean.org (gw2.antarean.org [141.105.125.208]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0912AE082D for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2015 14:15:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gw2.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24C00121435 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2015 14:14:30 +0000 () X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at antarean.org Received: from gw2.antarean.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (gw2.antarean.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HGYivAFEIGGV for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2015 14:14:24 +0000 (%Z) Received: from data.antarean.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gw2.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D0C512139A for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2015 14:14:24 +0000 () Received: from [10.5.226.252] (unknown [64.79.151.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by data.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 06B114B for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2015 16:14:56 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <87wq1mjnyx.fsf@heimdali.yagibdah.de> References: <87384gni7b.fsf@heimdali.yagibdah.de> <87wq1mjnyx.fsf@heimdali.yagibdah.de> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] xen on new install reboots by itself From: "J. Roeleveld" Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 07:12:11 -0700 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Message-ID: X-Archives-Salt: f980d1df-fc50-4bba-8e42-5dd35c9470c3 X-Archives-Hash: 7d2e27c6e500196df0f6a9628ceb366a On 8 April 2015 14:43:02 GMT-07:00, lee wrote: >hydra writes: > >> On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 3:20 PM, lee wrote: >> >>> symack writes: >>> >>> Other than that, unless you really do need full virtualization: I'm >>> finding Linux containers to be far more manageable than virtual >>> machines, and much more efficient. >>> >>> >> Can you please post some more details? > >About containers? > >There's very useful documentation about them like >https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/LXC ... > >What can I say? Virtualization with xen is like juggling with a set of >black boxes each of which aren't exactly accessible; the >documentation sucks, it's hard work to get it running and likewise hard >to maintain. I disagree. Been using Xen for over 10 years now and find it very easy to use. The documentation could be better on the Xen site itself, but there is plenty of decent documentation available via Google. >Virtualization with containers is basically as simple as running just >another daemon. Not quite. I use virtualization to minimizer the physical hardware. Xen is easy for that. Containers are what chroot jails should have been. But there is no simple method to set these up when security isolation is your goal. >Which the "better" tool, or combination of tools is, depends on what >you >want to accomplish. You could use containers in a VM, too, or use >virtualbox along with containers to run the odd VMs that require full >virtualzation. Virtualbox is nice for a quick test. I wouldn't use it for production. -- Joost -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.